Documents disclose 'shadow government'

WND ^ | 9/26/06 | unknown (Jerry Corsi)

[beyond the sea]

carrot-apple

Try it ............ before those lips flap too much. Get in that kitchen, girl.

:-)

It's great for you and it tastes delicious.

Any ratio around 50/50 is fine.

[sully777]

[jonrick46]

The Republicans I sense, may be seeing things happening that we do not. Such things as contribution levels from their supporters. DemonRAT contributors are pouring money into the Party because they see a chance to take both the House and the Senate. Money is being raised as if this were a Presidential year. When a Republican candidate sees money being raised that is two to one to their level, they see a bad omen in the making. I suspect that not all this money is coming in from DemonRAT Americans. I think it is also from the Mahmoud Ahmadinejads and the Hugo Chevas of the world. Count also George Soros' money.

Such money will go for the air war that the stupid American electorate will eat up like fat swine. The DemonRAT Party mascot should be that of the Pig. Such a pig has only the public trough on its mind. They are stupid enough think that the public trough is theirs to take if they elect a candidate that says it's OK. Little do they know that they are being taken in with the first tactic of Marxism. Yes, they will be given the public trough only to fatten them up for the slaughter!

[beyond the sea]

I don't quite see it your way.

[beyond the sea]

That sounds disgusting. Whatever made you decide to drink such a concoction?

By the way, you may want to try the carrot/apple juice drink.

It just may improve your lovely disposition.

[Alia]

This is not a shadow government "operation". It's perfectly legal and aboveboard.

You want to learn about a genuine "shadow government operation", all one needed to do was scratch under the surface of former CA Governor Davis "governorship" and the CA energy crisis, to learn more about "a shadow operation" involving CA Democrats and Mexico and Canada. CA Dems were usurping our sovereignity as a nation through INSERTING UN LANGUAGE into the CA constitution.

[beyond the sea]

You're right.... it's not "shadow" at all. But most Americans haven't a clue.

[beyond the sea]

CA Dems were usurping our sovereignity as a nation through INSERTING UN LANGUAGE into the CA constitution.

It may be just the ugly beginning. I hope not.

[K-oneTexas]

So beginnings prior to current Administration, possibly 1998. Another benefit from the Clinton Administration. Maybe we should look further back to see when the "skids" actually began being greased. This isn't a new idea.

[hedgetrimmer]

No, it isn't legal nor is it aboveboard.

We Americans are guaranteed a constitutional government. The creation of the SPP, without the oversight of Congress ( I use the word oversight in the legal sense) is an abomination. Its network of 'public private partnerships' are textbook examples of corporatist fascism. Together these actions are clearly in opposition to the Constitution and the American system. No American can condone these actions.All Americans must fight to restore Constitutional government.

[hedgetrimmer]

Bush senior contributed a great deal to the process. It may have started when he was in the CIA.

[hedgetrimmer]

U.S. Official Outlines Essential Elements of Democracy
Maisto said that even though the [Inter-American Democratic ]charter can serve as an effective tool to "ward off political crises or impending challenges to constitutional order, there is still reluctance on the part of some countries to use it in this way."

So some two bit phony ambassador is promoting a supranational 'agreement' (they won't call it a treaty) that gives Venezuela the right to ward off a political crisis in our country, just as it gives us the right to invade his, or any other country in the hemisphere, ostensibly in the name of the war on terror.

Are we experiencing a 'constitutional crisis' yet with the 'shadow government'?

[Miss Behave]

FGS get a grip.

Corsi sees black helicopters and owns the market in tinfoil futures.

OK onyx, there goes my primo Italian coffee.

[beyond the sea]

Are we experiencing a 'constitutional crisis' yet with the 'shadow government'?

........ way past that point, but the citizens are sleeping, have pizza in their mouth, or have a cell phone stuck to their ear.

;-)

[maine-iac7]

Corsi sees black helicopters and owns the market in tinfoil futures.

The writer states:

The documents clearly reveal that SPP, working within the U.S. Department of Commerce...

Is this supposed to to sinister? Wouldn't that be the dept. to be working on such connections? Is he saying that the U.S. Dept of Commerce is a secret, "shadow" branch of govt.? Who knew? (sarc)

the writer inserts little catch phrases and words like trilateral invoking visions of the infamous Trilaterists as an ingenuous association ploy...(Heaven forbid we try to strengthen and solidify working relationships with our two neighbors...before one gets overrun by Chavez type leaders and the other tips totally into socialism.)

I would say, with the two recent elections in both countries = things are decidedly better. ..most particularly in Canada, where we now have a pro-U.S./Bush Premier - and the real Canadians - our counterpart conservatives - are now being heard.

The fact is, to get anything done on the positive, NON-socialist side, we have to leave, for the most part, the dimRAts out of the loop. Where is it written that the congresscritters and Senate gets to make every decision on every matter? Isn't that why we have separation of powers?

[WatchingInAmazement]

Are we experiencing a 'constitutional crisis' yet with the 'shadow government'?

We were probably "there" by the time NAFTA was signed. And the "shadow" is people like John Cornyn who keeps, year after year, introducing a bill [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51222]to implement this mess and then acts surprised about the bill when he's called on it,as if he didn't understand what it said.

One would imagine by this time in human history, that we would realize that politicians have been the same short sighted, greedy, self indulgent sell outs that they've always been. Periodically they have to be reigned in, or they take over and muck up whatever progress was made. I believe our founding fathers weren't "politicians" (many succeded later in that), they just set out to "reign" in that out of control power. I understand more and more every day why they were so against established political parties. Unfortunately that didn't last long either. People became complacent and found other wars to fight and let this government get out of hand then and several times since. I think this is one of those times.

Few seem to want to reign them in if that big "R" or "D" is next to their names. It's almost tribal and primitive. My "R" right or wrong! Not for any logical or honorable reason, just "because".

This is interesting by John Stossel today.

Big Business Loves Government

I keep reading that big business wants government off its back. But that's a myth. Here's the truth:

"[B]ig business and big government prosper from the perception that they are rivals instead of partners (in plunder). The history of big business is one of cooperation with big government."

That's Timothy Carney writing in a recent Cato Policy Report. He's the author of a new book, "The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money." Carney's book shows that government and business are not antagonists but allies. They've always been allies. Politicians like it that way because they get power and prestige, and businessmen like it because they get protection from competition.

There was never a time in America when big business didn't get favors from government, which means the taxpayers. Canal and railroad companies loved the big government contracts. Corruption was rampant, and work was often shoddy, but the contracts paid handsomely. The politicians prospered, too. Only taxpayers and consumers lost out. The history books say that during the Progressive era, government trustbusters reined in business. Nonsense. Progressive "reforms" -- railroad regulation, meat inspection, drug certification and the rest -- were done at the behest of big companies that wanted competition managed. They knew regulation would burden smaller companies more than themselves. The strategy works. Regulation isn't the only form of protection that big business gets from government. Companies with political clout get cash subsidies, low-interest loans, loan guarantees and barriers to cheap imports. Even foreign aid is a subsidy to big business because governments receiving the taxpayers' money buy American exports. Fans of foreign aid say those exports are good for the economy because they create jobs. Don't believe it. If the taxpayers had been able to keep the money, their spending would have created other jobs -- probably more jobs.

Most people don't realize that Enron favored the Kyoto Protocol on climate change and wanted energy regulations beneficial to itself; Philip Morris favors tobacco regulation; Wal-Mart's CEO came out for a higher minimum wage; and General Motors embraces tough clean-air rules. Why? Because, as Carney points out, big companies with lots of lawyers and accountants can make the regulations work for themselves, while smaller competitors are hampered.

Carney's is not the first book to bash big business. What makes his different is that rather than opposing the free market, he loves it -- which is why he hates the business-government alliance. In a free market the consumer calls the shots. In the corporate state the business-government alliance restricts consumer choice.

Another friend of the free market hated the business-government alliance: Adam Smith. In "The Wealth of Nations" Smith wrote, "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publick. . . . But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary."

There's where things went wrong. The government does facilitate such assemblies. More than that, it provides big business something it can't have in the free market: the power to restrict competition by force. Anyone worried about the power of big business should remember real coercion comes only from government.

The voluntary, competitive marketplace is better for us all.

__ http://www.realclearpolitics.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/09/big_business_loves_government.html___

_

[AmishDude]

Oh, we've already hired them.

We're that secret.

[KevinDavis]

Correction, I'm the Emperor of the NAU...

[hedgetrimmer]

Thank you for your post. Your article touches on why 'public-private partnerships' are so dangerous. "But though the law ... ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary."

When public-private partnerships become a necessity to do business, as they are fast becoming, then there is no free market, no free enterprise and indivdiual rights disappear.

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"So go vote for Democrats, or some 3rd party candidate no one has ever heard of and see what ya get....."

Neo-Cons to Neo-Coms (Communist).